tv Tonight From Washington CSPAN March 3, 2011 8:00pm-11:00pm EST
education, research. and now toave the republican leader come and tell us we've got to accept that, that's the future of america. no, it's not. time and again when we sit down to deal with the budget challenges, whether it's in the deficit commission, which i was honest servicessered to serve on -- which i was honored to serve on, or whether it's in past negotiations, we open this table up to all federal spending, not just to 14%, that tiny slice of a pie. senator mcconnell c remembe remember, and i can too, under president herbert walker bush and under president clinton, we put on the table these tax breaks for some of these oil companies and corporations and said, is it really worth america's future for us to give them a tax break or to use the money to reduce the deficit? that's an honest question. mandatory spending. all of these things need to be brought to the table for conversation. but that's not the position of the republicans. they would rather see us shut down the government than to open
this conversation to the entire federal budget. they would rather see us shut down the government than fight to make sure that education and training, research and innovation, and infrastructure are there to build a strong american economy for the future. i would sty my friend, senator mcconnell from ken -- say to my friend, senator mcconnell from kentucky, we don't need any speech from that side of the aisle about a national debt that more than doubled under the last republican president. we've got to work together in a bipartisan way, acknowledging the reality of history, that we all have had a hand in reaching the point we are today, both positive and negative points where we are today, and we all need to take a responsible position to move us
friend and partner, president calderón, back to the white house. i want to discuss our meeting today and then address the situation in libya. president calderón was last here, along with first lady señora zavala, for a very productive state visit last spring -- a visit that reflected the new era of respect and cooperation and partnership between our two countries. we've since worked together as global partners at the g20 summits in toronto and seoul and at the apec summit in yokohama. and i very much appreciate president calderón being here today to deepen the cooperation that is so essential to the prosperity and security of both of our countries. of course, the relationship between the united states and mexico isn't measured just in the partnership between two presidents.
it's evident every day in the strong bonds between our two societies. it's the thousands of people who work together, at every level -- federal, states and community levels -- to keep our citizens safe, to keep our economies growing. it's the tens of thousands of students and teachers and researchers in exchanges between our schools and our universities. it's the one million people who cross our shared border every day -- tourists and business people -- sustaining one of the largest trading relationships in the world. and it's our families and our friends -- the many americans living in mexico, and the tens of millions of mexican americans who make outstanding contributions to this country every single day. as i said, we're also global partners. as part of the g20, we're advancing the global economic recovery, and i look forward to visiting mexico when president calderón hosts the g20 next year.
together, we've responded to the earthquake in haiti, and we're securing the world's vulnerable nuclear materials. i especially want to commend president calderón for mexico's successful leadership of the cancun conference, including progress toward a green fund that he himself helped to get started and champion and which will help developing countries adapt to climate change. most recently, our governments have spoken out forcefully for the human rights of the libyan people, and mexico played a leading role at the united nations in suspending libya from the human rights council.
president calderón, this not only reflects our commitment to the shared values of freedom and justice and rule of law. it's also another example of mexico's global leadership -- as you said in your address to our congress last year -- that "mexico is standing tall" and ready to take its "rightful place in the world. " it is this appreciation of the great bonds between americans and mexicans, and the values and responsibilities that we hold in common that allowed us to make progress once again today. we're working to expand the trade that creates jobs for our peoples. remember, mexico is the second largest market for american exports. it supports some 1 million american jobs. and our exports to mexico are growing faster than they are with the rest of the world. so we're moving ahead with plans for a 21st century border so people and goods can cross securely and efficiently. we're working to coordinate and streamline regulations and get rid of unnecessary trade barriers to make it easier to do business together. we're making new investments in clean energy partnerships,
including green buildings and smart grid technologies. and based on negotiations so far, i'm hopeful that we can conclude an agreement by the end of the year to develop new sources of energy in the gulf of mexico. i'm especially pleased to announce that, after nearly 20 years, we finally have found a clear path to resolving the dispute over trucking between our two countries. i thank president calderón and his team -- as well as my transportation secretary, ray lahood, and our u.s. trade representative, ambassador ron kirk -- for reaching this proposed agreement. i look forward to consulting with congress and moving forward in a way that strengthens the safety of cross- border trucking, lifts tariffs on billions of dollars of u.s. goods, expands our exports to mexico, and creates job on both sides of the border. we're also deepening our cooperation against the drug cartels that threaten both our peoples. as i've said before, president calderón and the mexican people have shown extraordinary courage in the fight for their
country. tens of thousands of mexicans -- innocent citizens and dedicated security forces -- have lost their lives. i have reaffirmed to president calderón that in this cause, mexico has a full partner with the united states. because whether they live in texas or tijuana, our people have a right to be safe in their communities. so we are continuing to speed up the delivery of equipment and training that our mexican partners need to keep up this fight. as president calderón cracks down on money laundering in mexico, we're putting unprecedented pressure on cartels and their finances here in the united states. and we thank our mexican partners for their close cooperation following the murder of one of our immigration and customs agents, special agent jaime zapata. i reiterated that the united states accepts our shared responsibility for the drug violence. so to combat the southbound flow of guns and money, we are screening all southbound rail cargo, seizing many more guns bound for mexico and we are putting more gunrunners behind
bars. and as part of our new drug control strategy, we are focused on reducing the demand for drugs through education, prevention and treatment. we have also discussed immigration, an issue on which both countries have responsibilities. as i told president calderón, i remain deeply committed to fixing our broken immigration system with comprehensive reform that continues to secure our borders, enforces our laws -- including against businesses that break the law -- and requiring accountability from undocumented workers. and we have to conduct this debate in a way that upholds our values as a nation of both laws and immigrants.
so i'm eager to work with republicans and democrats to get this reform done, which is vital to the u.s. economy. finally, i'm looking forward to receiving insights from the president as i prepare for my trip to latin america this month, which will be an opportunity to strengthen our security cooperation throughout the region. mr. president, thank you for your partnership and for deepening the bonds between our countries, which only grow stronger each time that we meet. now, before i turn it over to president calderón, i want to address the situation in libya. the united states, and the entire world, continues to be outraged by the appalling violence against the libyan people. the united states is helping to lead an international effort to deter further violence, put in place unprecedented sanctions to hold the qaddafi government accountable, and support the aspirations of the libyan people. we are also responding quickly to the urgent humanitarian needs that are developing.
tens of thousands of people -- from many different countries -- are fleeing libya, and we commend the governments of tunisia and egypt for their response, even as they go through their own political transitions. i have, therefore, approved the use of u.s. military aircraft to help move egyptians who have fled to the tunisian border to get back home to egypt. i've authorized usaid to charter additional civilian aircraft to help people from other countries find their way home, and we're supporting the efforts of international organizations to evacuate people as well. i've also directed usaid to send humanitarian assistance teams to the libyan border, so that they can work with the united nations, ngos and other international partners inside libya to address the urgent needs of the libyan people. going forward, we will continue to send a clear message: the violence must stop. muammar qaddafi has lost the legitimacy to lead and he must leave. those who perpetrate violence against the libyan people will be held accountable. and the aspirations of the
libyan people for freedom, democracy and dignity must be met. president calderón. >> thank you very much, president obama. thank you so much for your hospitality. ladies and gentlemen of the media, good afternoon. president barack obama and i have held a very valuable conversation concerning the status of our bilateral cooperation and many aspects of this. as always, it has been very satisfying for me to see that we agree on the basic principle of co-responsibility. and i thank you, mr. president, for your invitation to hold this working visit here in the city of washington. some of the things that we evaluated is that our governments have progressed substantially on many of these aspects. the results of our cooperation in some aspects, unprecedented cooperation, have been translated into concrete examples, such as the opening last year in 2010 of the three first new border crossings over the past 10 years. my state visit last year, as you mentioned, mr. president, and the ongoing meetings that
we have held and that we will continue to have in the immediate future have been especially important to our bilateral relationship so as to generate confidence -- the confidence that we have today. we know today that we need to continue to be personally involved so as to ensure that the objectives that we trace are reached, such as those dealt with today. and we have broached the following subjects today. first, internationally, at the international level, we have reiterated that mexico and the united states are authentic, strategic partners, as can be seen by our joint work on the global and regional agendas.
we have achieved substantive progress, as mentioned by president obama, in matters such as climate change during the conference of the parties 16. and now we have made efforts to make the agreements reached in cancun operational and as well as to adopt the next steps for the conference of the parties 17 in durban. both countries will also play an important role within the g20, a mechanism that mexico will be presiding over next year and in which we have reached important agreements for stability and recovery of the international economy. and in this context i would like to congratulate president obama for the visit that he will be making to brazil, chile and el salvador in a few weeks' time. greater dialogue among the united states and latin american nations will always be beneficial to the hemisphere, and beneficial not just for latin american countries but also for the united states. the specific case of central
america, in addition here we've agreed to continue to work with the u.s. government so as to achieve more determined cooperation in support of regional efforts to strengthen the rule of law and the fight transnational organized crime. secondly, in terms of the border, both president obama and i agree that we must turn this area into the land of opportunities and not of conflict. last year we adopted a declaration on the administration of a 21st century border, which we want both for the united states and mexico. and since then, the bilateral executive committee entrusted with that implementation has agreed to a plan of action in addition to issuing a joint declaration to prevent border violence, so as to enable us to avoid tragic events such as those that we've seen on both sides of the border.
thirdly, in terms of immigration, president obama has always recognized, invariably recognized the contributions of immigrants to the economy and society of the united states, and i recognize and value his clear and determined support for the adoption of a comprehensive migratory reform in this country, as well as his firm commitment to the human and civil rights of communities, regardless of their point of origin. i've expressed to him my concern for the proliferation of local initiatives that are against the interests or the rights of immigrant communities. fourth, in terms of competitiveness, mexico has a regional perspective. the united states and mexico can and must make the most of the comparative advantages that make us unique as a region and that would enable us to convert, to turn north america in its entirety into the most competitive region of the world. i am convinced that together we can achieve this. the north america free trade
agreement was a great step forward for the commercial trade integration of the region. it generated hundreds of thousands, even millions, of jobs in the united states and in mexico. and we are ready to deepen and to make the most of this relationship. we must work efficiently to take advantage of the relative abundance of capital in the united states with the labor manpower available in mexico through productive actions, investments in our countries, as well as the access that is secure, orderly and legal of national workers from mexico in the u.s. market. our governments, something that is very important to us, have today reached an agreement, an agreement to solve our differences with respect to cross-border cargo trucking that
had existed for many years. as i said, this has existed for a long time despite the fact that we had -- that the integrated system for transportation existed and benefited both countries. it was strengthening our competitiveness and it generated jobs and it existed since 1994 when we agreed on the nafta. in this sense, mexico will be suspended -- will be phasing out reprisals after non-compliance of the free trade agreement of north america by the united states and will be ending -- and as a result of this, will be furthering liberalization of
cargo transportation. the objective of my government has always been to reach a solution that's mutually acceptable in this field. and fifth, in the chapter of security, both governments have taken on our positions as co- responsible parties in the fight against transnational organized crime. this is a paradigm change in our relationship. and today we have reached increased levels of exchange of information that are unheard of in the past. i would like to thank president obama for the clarity with which he speaks of the effects that the consumption of drugs has on his country, as well as the illegal traffic of weapons and of monies into mexican territory. i know that together we can achieve ever greater results. last year was the year where we had the greatest number of achievements in the capture of the number of criminals --
unprecedented number of criminals were caught, and this is the result of the increase of the institutional capacity of our agencies as well as international cooperation in terms of information and intelligence. i also truly value the clear effort of the united states through transfer of equipment and training programs to our efforts -- added to our efforts of institution -- institutional efforts. and this i am sure will further our efforts tremendously.
and i thank you for your support there, mr. president. and i also am grateful for the clarity with which president obama has recognized the great sacrifices that the mexican society has had to make in view of organized crime and our fight of drug trafficking. in the fight for the security of mexico, thousands of military officers and members of the police force have died in mexico. they fall in the line of duty. and to these deaths we add the death of agent jaime zapata from the immigration and customs enforcement agency of the united states. and i would like to add my deepest condolences to his relatives, to the people and government of united states in view of his death. i would like to tell you that the suspected perpetrator of his murder and his gang has been arrested and we hope to bring them to justice. his death must urge us to continue to work together so as to ensure a prosperous and peaceful future for our region. ladies and gentlemen, today i'd like to say that i thank the
hospitality of president obama, and i would reiterate my trust, my confidence in the government and institutions of this country. this country is a good friend to mexico, as is president obama. this opportunity represents for me a chance to strongly renew our efforts and to redouble our efforts to accomplish the security that our peoples deserve. at the same time, i would like to congratulate president obama for the leadership that he has shown in the problem of concern to all of us in north africa, heading up the responsible
efforts of the people and government of the united states to quickly find solutions to this problem. mr. president, once again, thank you ever so much for your hospitality, the friendship that you have always shown to mexico, the responsibility that your government, your administration has unprecedently taken on in the subjects, the issues that are of common interest to us. our bilateral relationship, my friends, does not only have a huge impact on the lives of mexicans and americans, but today it's taken on with increasing strength and clarity and coordination by both of our governments. once again, thank you for your personal commitment, the cooperation, and co- responsibility of your government. we will continue to work together and harder to achieve the prosperity of both the mexican and u.s. peoples. thank you very much. >> i think we're going to take one question each. ben feller, ap. >> thank you very much, mr. president. i have a question for both presidents -- and in your case, sir, i suppose it's a classic two-parter.
>> with a follow-up? so making it a three-parter? >> thank you, sir. on libya, i wanted to follow up on your comments. colonel qaddafi is vowing to fight to the end, and in the meantime, the people of his country are dying. now, i know that you've admonished the press corps about impatience and i know that the international community and the united states have taken several steps, and you've named many of those today. but i'm wondering while this is happening, if you fear this is headed for a bloody stalemate. and more specifically, is a no- fly zone something that you're actively considering?
and can you talk about what you see is your broader doctrine for military intervention in a crisis like this? the other topic is something that is quite different but does matter to millions of americans. the national football league is on the brink of a complete shutdown as of tonight over a labor dispute. obviously that's an economic issue for cities but also something that a lot of people just care about. and i'm wondering if it's something that you'd be willing to personally intervene on. and if not, why not? president calderón, sir, i was wondering your thoughts on an issue that's come up about potentially arming u.s. agents in mexico. it's come up here in the u.s. attorney general holder has raised it as at least something that should be considered. i'm wondering if you will consider it, and if that came up with president obama. thank you both. >> all right. let me deal with football first. you've got owners, most of whom are worth close to a billion dollars. you got players who are making millions of dollars. my working assumption at a time when people are having to cut back, compromise, and worry
about making the mortgage and paying for their kids' college education is, is that the two parties should be able to work it out without the president of the united states intervening. i'm a big football fan, but i also think that for an industry that's making $9 billion a year in revenue, they can figure out how to divide it up in a sensible way, and be true to their fans who are the ones who obviously allow for all the money that they're making. so my expectation and hope is, is that they will resolve it without me intervening, because it turns out i've got a lot of other stuff to do. with respect to libya, i think you asked about do i have a doctrine. my approach throughout the convulsions that have swept through the middle east is, number one, no violence against citizens, number two, that we stand for freedom and democracy. and in the situation in libya, what you've seen is, number one, violence against citizens, and the active urging of violence against unarmed citizens by qaddafi, and number two, you have seen with great clarity that he has lost
legitimacy with his people. and so let me just be very unambiguous about this. colonel qaddafi needs to step down from power and leave. that is good for his country. that is good for his people. it's the right thing to do. those around him have to understand that violence that they perpetrate against innocent civilians will be monitored and they will be held accountable for it. and so to the extent that they are making calculations in their own minds about which way history is moving, they should know history is moving against
colonel qaddafi, and that their support for him and their willingness to carry out orders that are direct violence against citizens is something that ultimately they will be held accountable for. with respect to our willingness to engage militarily, what i've instructed the department of defense as well as our state department and all those who are involved in international affairs to examine is a full range of options. i don't want us hamstrung. i want us to be making our decisions based on what's going to be best for the libyan people, in consultation with the international community. and we are doing that not just here in the united states within our own agencies, but we're also doing it in consultation with nato. we have already engineered the
most rapid and forceful set of sanctions that have ever been applied internationally. we started unilaterally freezing $30 billion worth of assets, imposing severe sanctions against those in the libyan government who've been carrying out some of these crimes. and as a consequence of leadership, what we've seen is i think broad-based mobilization around the international community. you are right that there is a danger of a stalemate that over time could be bloody, and that is something that we are obviously considering. so what i want to make sure of is that the united states has full capacity to act potentially rapidly if the situation deteriorated in such a way that you had a humanitarian crisis on our hands, or a situation in which civilians
were -- defenseless civilians were finding themselves trapped and in great danger. i think it's very important for us to do this in consultation, though, with the international community. one of the extraordinary successes of egypt was the full ownership that the egyptian people felt for that transformation. that has served the egyptian people well. it serves u.s. interests well. we did not see anti-american sentiment arising out of that movement in egypt precisely because they felt that we hadn't tried to engineer or impose a particular outcome, but rather they owned it. the same is happening is tunisia. and i think that the region we'll be watching carefully to make sure we're on the right side of history but also that we are doing so as a member of the world community, and being
willing to act on behalf of these values but doing so in a way that takes all the various equities into account. so just to put sort of the final point on it, we are looking at every option that's out there. in addition to the non-military actions that we've taken, i want to make sure that those full range of options are available to me. some of them may end up being humanitarian. i mean, the biggest priority that we have right now is you've got tens of thousand people -- tens of thousands of people who are gathered at a border and we've got to make sure that they can get home. and that's why we -- we're using some of our military aircrafts in addition to civilian aircrafts to help on that front. there may be situations in which qaddafi is hunkered down in his compound but the economy or food distribution systems in tripoli, for example, start
deteriorating, and we're going to have to figure out how do we potentially get food in there. so there are a whole range of options, military and non- military, that we're examining and we'll be making these decisions based on what's best for the libyan people and how can we make sure that we're minimizing the harm to innocent civilians during this process. throughout all this, we will continue to send the clear message that it's time for qaddafi to go. >> and a no-fly zone is one of those options still under consideration? >> that is one of the options that we would be looking at. >> first, in terms of libya, i recognize and applaud the efforts undertaken by president obama, as i said previously, to seek a solution in line with international law for this situation. for mexico it's absolutely clear that we cannot -- it's not possible that civilians be massacred and not go punished ,
using weapons that are for the exclusive use of war. we must do everything that we can to avoid or stop that massacre. mexico indeed has presented a resolution within the framework of the human rights commission of the united nations. and in this libya has been sanctioned by the commission. and we are of course taking part, insofar as we are able to, in the search for a solution to this problem. i believe that today it is -- problem to re-value the principles and the values of human rights anywhere in the world -- the principles and values that we recognize and value. we have them in north american society and people, in terms of that we condemn any act of violence against people where
people are risking their lives, in terms of the use of weapons. we condemn any act of violence against these people, and we believe that people must have the best conditions to guarantee their work, including their personal security. and in this effort i know that we have the support of different agencies of the government of the united states who have contributed enormously to the solution of the problems that we are facing together under the principle of shared responsibility that we are consolidating. i must nonetheless clarify that there are very important legal restrictions in this matter in mexico, as is probably the case in other countries, and most
likely the united states, with respect to the actions of foreign agents in mexican land. the law does not allow agents of the united states or of any other country to take part in tasks involving justice enforcement in our territory. as a result, they cannot carry weapons or undertake operational tasks. their functions, in line with our treaties, are limited to the exchange of information, and technical assistance to support mexican authorities in these tasks. so there's an important legal restriction that exists. but it's very clear for me, as well, that we must find the way of enhancing the level of protection of any and all agents who are acting within the framework of the law against crime. and of course, we are deeply analyzing alternatives for this, and in dialogue with the mexican congress who is the party that has the final word, the final say on this matter.
and finally on the issue of football, i'm not an expert -- my wife is, though. and i will ask her about it. i'm sure that she's very concerned about the situation. but allow me to say that football is very important for many mexicans. with the exception of barney, you can count on us. >> i will say that at the state dinner, the first lady of mexico seemed quite excited to see mark sanchez there. i don't know if that was of concern to you. >> you've already flipped the coin in a jets game -- mrs. zavala did.
>> taking advantage of the moment and continuing the subject matter, i'm not going to ask many questions, but i will be very concrete. first, directly for president obama, the second amendment of the united states constitution allows american citizens to carry weapons and this principle is defended. however, president calderón has said that this law in congress -- this could actually go against u.s. agents, and this has happened. so, president obama, in mexico we have the veto, the power of veto. i don't know how far you have the ability to veto that law that has been approved.
and if you have that responsibility, why don't you do so, sir? how long are we going to allow mexicans to be murdered -- and not just mexicans, but now americans, as well? now, with respect to the secretary of homeland security janet napolitano has sent a bill or spoken to congress with respect to the possibility of allowing u.s. agents to bear arms in our country -- president calderón has already answered this to a certain extent, but he's also said that he will be searching for mechanisms. what types of mechanisms can be found so as to keep them safe? and the people who murdered zapata -- well, in mexican terms -- who was the alleged murderer of zapata, the extradition of this man, of this
alleged perpetrator has been requested. madam napolitano has mentioned this. president calderón, how far are you going to go in those efforts? and there you would have my questions. >> well, the second amendment in this country is part of our constitution and the president of the united states is bound by our constitution. so i believe in the second amendment. it does provide for americans the right to bear arms for their protection, for their safety, for hunting, for a wide range of uses. that does not mean that we cannot constrain gunrunners from shipping guns into mexico. and so we believe that we can shape an enforcement strategy
that slows the flow of guns into mexico, while at the same time preserving our constitution. you asked whether i have veto power over a particular bill. i think that the challenge that we have right now is not a particular bill, but rather that we are trying to work our way through more effective enforcement mechanisms to prevent straw purchasers from buying caches of weapons, transporting them across the border. we've made progress on that front, given the authority and administrative power that we already possess. we have seen a significant increase in the number of weapons that have been confiscated. we have put more and more people
behind bars for the transfer of weapons across the border into mexico. we recognize that it's not enough and that we've got to do more. part of that job is to enforce the laws that are already on the books more effectively. part of it may be to provide additional tools to law enforcement so that we can prevent the shipment of these weapons across the border. but i do want to emphasize -- and i emphasized this privately with president calderón -- we are very mindful that the battle president calderón is fighting inside of mexico is not just his battle, it's also ours. we have to take responsibility just as he's taking responsibility. and that's true with respect to guns flowing from north to south, it's true about cash flowing north to south. and so we've stepped up our enforcement and monitoring of bulk cash transfers across the
borders that oftentimes finance these cartels. so we're putting more and more resources into this. one of the things that i think that president calderón and i have discussed is how we can strengthen border security on both sides, so that drugs flowing north or guns and cash flowing south, that we are able at all these points to intervene, interdict in a way that doesn't, on the other hand, slow the commerce and trade that is so important between our two countries. it's a challenging task. we have a big border. we have a lot of people going back and forth. it's very important economically. but it is something that we have to continue to work on. and i just want to say to all the people in the mexican press that i have nothing but admiration for president
calderón and his willingness to take this on. the easy thing to do would be for him to ignore the corrosive, corrupting influence of these drug cartels within mexico. that would be the easy thing to do. he's taking the hard path. and he's shown great courage and great risk in doing so. and the united states will support him in any ways that we can in order to help him achieve his goals, because his goals are our goals, as well. and they should be the goals of the mexican people -- because the notion that you would want these drug cartels to become more and more powerful and have greater and greater influence in the political life and the economic life and the cultural life of your country i think is something that nobody would want. with respect to arming our agents, i think president
calderón was very clear. there are laws in place in mexico that say that our agents should not be armed. the relationship that we have is, as president calderón, described it: when it comes to our partnership, our cooperation in battling the drug cartels, our job is to help with information, it's to help with equipment, it's to help in coordination. we are in an advisory capacity, we do not carry out law enforcement activities inside of mexico. what we can do is to make sure that our cooperation is strengthened and deepened and becomes more effective over time. and we're constantly refining how we do that in a way that is respectful of mexico's sovereignty. and obviously i'm concerned about our own agents who are down there. and so i assure you that we will be examining all our procedures and protocols in
terms of how our agents travel throughout mexico. and we'll be working in close contact with mexican law enforcement who i'm sure will have important advice in terms of how we operate in that region. but this cooperation has made great progress. we expect it to continue to make more progress in the future. >> i'd like to thank president obama for this wonderful support in terms of weapons. others have made similar efforts before his administration in terms of deterring the flow of weapons to mexico, but we know that what has to do with internal homeland security and the attorney general are making important efforts and we know that even more weapons traffickers, gunrunners, have been caught than ever before.
there's a great deal that has to be improved in terms of how to share information, how to trace the weapons. and i also recognize, as i said, the efforts, knowing the large restrictions that president obama and his administration have at a political level. they're making great efforts internally so that through administrative measures we can broach this matter. one of the things that i suggested during our conversation -- and i think we still have to look at this very carefully -- is if we can find a means of sealing ports of entry along the border. as the president said and as i said, through the use of non- intrusive mechanisms for detection, we could assuredly have the safe and secure border that both nations want, that both peoples want.
we all want to have a safe border. i believe it's possible, although it will require huge technological and financial resources to achieve it. but i think it's a way of ensuring security without affecting the second amendment rights of u.s. citizens, and at the same time stop the flow of drugs northbound, monies and guns southbound. i would insist upon the legal restrictions that exist in mexico as in other countries with respect to intervention and the bearing of arms by u.s. agents. but on this subject, i'll have to speak to members of congress, particularly the senate, to explore different alternatives. and i think we have to look at all alternatives that are enabled to us by the constitution and the law, mechanisms of protection -- special mechanisms of protection, clear delineation of the areas where we can collaborate, for instance.
the criminals themselves, they tell us that they didn't know that they were attacking u.s. agents in their attack, so it's not that that's what they wanted to do. but i think at any rate this is still a very important sign -- a warning sign to all of us where we have to be -- indicating that we have to be very careful about how we care for all of our agents -- not just mexican, american -- all agents. we have to have a specific policy that's much more daring in this sense. and i think that here, not just in terms of weapons, guns, we have to think in a much more open manner and seek much more creative solutions. it seems to me that we are experiencing extraordinary circumstances that call for extraordinary actions by our governments. now, with respect to the
extradition of this criminal, it's something that we hadn't really discussed. obamat know if president wanted to discuss this. we still have not finished our meetings yet. although we have to review what the law stipulates in terms of the extradition for each case of it, i'm, in truth, very convinced that these cases have to be brought to trial. there is the political will, full political will, that this individual be brought to justice with the full weight of the law, whether that be in the united states or in mexico, if the law allows it. in terms of a request for extradition, i'd have to reserve my opinion in this sense because it will depend on what the law stipulates in this sense.
of course there is a political will to cooperate in this matter as well as on many others. >> i didn't comment on the extradition issue. let me just emphasize i think beyond that it's probably not appropriate to comment. okay? but we expect the full weight of the law to be brought against this perpetrator. thank you very much, everybody. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]
"in depth". join us sunday at noon eastern. watch previous programs at booktv.org, we can find the weekend schedule. -- where you can find the weekend schedule. >> a hearing on the homeland security department. and hhs secretary kathleen sebelius testifies on capitol hill on her department's 2012 dept. -- budget request. and then mexican president
calderon speaks at the woodrow wilson center. a couple live events to tell you about. a form on the future of fannie mae and freddie mac. that group includes professional organizations for asian and hispanic realtors. our coverage begins at 9 with the town hall discussion of immigration and housing policy. and at 10:00 a.m. eastern, the final hearing of the congressional oversight panel tarp's effect.t ta then representatives of the treasury department, and the federal reserve. >> this weekend, on cspan3. the 150th anniversary of the
testify on her department's fiscal year 2012 >> the committee is meeting relating to the president's fiscal year 2012 budget requests for the department of homeland security. she has a commitment to be at the white house and must leave the hearing before noon and the secretary has rearranged her schedule to be here today because we had to cancel out two weeks ago and we had a series of votes. i want to thank you for and trusting your schedule to us and we will have the hearing done in time for you to be at the white house. said, toearing is as i address the president's budget for 2012 in a time of budget restraints and cuts -- we
commend the secretary for putting forth a budget, i believe we have disagreements with it, it is on target and is trying to accommodate the need for cuts and also to protect our nation. we saw this again last week. we saw the rest of the saudi arabian national. this was another reminder of how serious the threat to our nation is. in your appearance here in february you said the nation is at its highest level of threat since september 11, 2001 and that is where we have to equate homeland security with national security and what ever money can be saved as far as programs and grants, it would be offset if we should see a successful attack launched on the u.s.. the devastating impact on our economy would be there as well.
i will not make a full statement because i believe it is important to get on. in view of the threats against the country and a crisis we face, if you would specifically address why you made certain cuts and why you kept certain programs going forward as they are. how old you think that accommodates threats we face. we discussed the issue of dirty bomb attacks and i commend the secretary for including the city initiatives which will affect cities throughout the nation. the concern i have is be -- the cuts that were made in border protection. i am not trying to make a partisan issue. do you think that considering the importance we have tax border security, whether there is sufficient funding to secure
the border and go forward with some of the the significant improvements that have been made under your watch? the issue of the saudi national who was arrested last week, do you feel more should be done with visa analysis? the department of homeland security is involved as well. the large numbers of foreign students in our country and we try to encourage that. should there be more of all level of surveillance, should there be a level of scrutiny to avoid this situation as we saw last week? and in closing, we have to express our thoughts and prayers to the family of the agent who was murdered and killed several weeks ago as well as his partner. the committee, our thoughts and prayers go out to them.
i look forward to the testimony. i know the top job you have, whether or not we agree, there is no doubt of your commitment. the good faith effort that was made is an example and i hope we can have an honest dialogue. i yield back the balance of my time and i recognize the ranking member. the gentleman from mississippi. >> thank you. we're here to receive testimony about the there is a matter of the 2011 budget.
they have chosen to kick the can down the road. they are reducing it by $1.1 billion or 3%. the same principle does not go to the public sector. they have a right to expect some predictability uncertainty as they pursue the counter- terrorism connectivity. there is a very real threat that dhs willng thfor
plunge to 2006 levels. my staff will provide analysis for how the budget would be negatively impacted by h.r. 408. the budget would be cut by $10.7 billion. it would mean that border protection lose $3 billion over 8200 border patrol agents. they would have to go. so much for operational control. it would require that it would be 20%. efforts to redress one of the
nation's greatest threats, cyber attacks would be severely hampered. the home of dhs operations would be cut by $275 million. these coast guard that protect our waterways and was the first to respond to the deepwater horizon of this bill will have to eliminate over 2700 positions. the list goes on and on. i'm fight those with an interest to go to the website. we all have the resources we need to keep the homeland security. the president also recognizes the importance of the role.
d.h. as will receive a slight increase. i have a question to make significant cuts for first responder grants. i want to hear from me about the proposed cuts. i would like to note my deep concern that hr1 approved by the house could create the kind of budgetary cinco that would swallow many proposals that you are here to present. >> thank you. i want to thank you again for being here. it probably seems like 300 at times. it is good to have the back. >> thank you. thank you. i appreciate the flexibility of
your schedule with this hearing this morning. president calderon will be at the white house at noon. that is what causes the scheduled jan. i am very grateful for your flexibility. i will be somewhat brief in order to save time for the questions. the demands have never been greater. this is especially true as a remember this web given their lives in service to our mission including border patrol agents bryant terry. mexico is leaving the criminal investigation into the death of agency zapata. we are supporting them through a task force. recently, mexican authorities have announced they have
apprehended some of the alleged killers. we are conducting a number of operations related to the drug cartels from mexico. we are not only saddened by the loss, we are outraged by this act of violence against an officer of the united states. justice will be brought to those involved. we are nothing less to the memory of him and the sewer still on it. this is a stark reminder of the sacrifices made by the members every day. it also strengthens our resolve to do everything in our power to protect a mitigate serious fun to threats and make our nation more resilient. it features adversaries to evolve quickly and are determined to strike as here at home from the global supply
chain, transportation to infrastructure. it allows us to continue to me these evolving threats. it maximizes the effectiveness of every dollar we received. reflecting the current fiscal environment, all component identified savings associated with the 33 efficiency review initiatives. we cut overhead including my office's budget by over $800 billion. we also delayed construction of the mets. we deferred a number of locations that accounts for
some of the numbers at i.c.e. it is almost all related to building maintenance. my reinstatement includes a comprehensive list of the priorities in the budget. today i will only highlight a few. this was a founding mission of the department. and it remains our top priority. there are behavioral detection officers, a k-9 teams, and it best imaging technology machines at domestic airports while expanding settings to the program and enhancing screening and targeting of international travelers. screening and targeting of international travelers before they board
u.s.-bound flights through the immigration advisory program. this budget also strengthens suace transportation security by supporting 12 new visible intermodal prevention and response, otherwise known as viper teams which conduct operation sltion throughout the transportationector to prevent potential terrorist activity. the request also provides funding for securing the cities program, to protect our highest risk cities from a raological or nuclear attack and makes a significant investment in the national bio and agra defense facility that provides enhangsed diagnostic capabilities to protect our country from foreign animal and emerging diseases. and the request eands support for the national network of state and local fusion centers to provide local law enforcement with the tools to address threats to our communities. now, to secure and manage our
borders, the request continues the administration's historic border security efforts by supporting 21,370 border patrol agents and 21,186 u.s. customs and border protection officers, both all-time highs. this budget also includes 242 million dollars for the continued deploymen of proven, effective surveillance technology along the highest trafficked areas of the southwest border to better meet the operational requirements of our agents on the front lines. r the northern border, this budget request supports investments in technology tailored to the maritime and cold weather environment. and for our nation's maritime borders, this budget includes funding to continue the essential national security cutter program and makes historic investments to recapitalize the coast guard's aging assets including six fast response cutters and 40 response boats.
this budget also continues the department's focus on smart and effective enforcement of our nation's immigration laws. while streamlining and facilitating the legal immigration process. building on our record over the past two years, the departnt will continue to prioritize the identification and removal of criminal aliens who pose a threat to public safety and target employers who knowingly and repeatedly break the law. this request enables i.c.e. to fund 33,400 detention beds, remove over 200,000 criminal aliens and deploy secure communities to 96% of all jurisdictions nationally in fy 2012 while promoting compliance with work site related laws through criminal prosecution of egregious employers, form i-9 inspections and continued expansion and enhangsment of e.
verify and funds immigration efforts including programs supporting english language and citizenship education and continues the detention reform efforts currently under way. now, to safeguard and secure cyberspace, this budget increases resources to identify and reduce vulnerabilities to our nation's key cyber networks. the request includes significant investments to expedite the employment of einstein 3, to prevent and detect intrusions on government computer systems, increase federal network security and continue to develop a robust cyber security workforce. now, to ensure resilience to disasters, the budget request focuses on moving resources out of washington, d.c., and into the hands of state and local responders. by sustaining federal funding for state and local preparedness grants, providing over $3.8 billion in fiscal year 2012. this funding includ $670
million for assistance to firefighter grants. and th includes $420 million to hire an estimated 2300 laidoff firefightersand veteran first responders. to lead and support security efforts this budget expands the coast guard's operational capacity by funding 50,682 military and civilian positions and establishing the coast guard's first incident management response team -- assistance team -- excuse me -- which will be deployed rapidly to exploit incidents of nationa its kind effort by the department through the quadrennial homeland security review and associated bottom up review to align our resources with a comprehensive strateg to ensure a safe, secure and resilient homeland while making an unprecedented commitment to
fiscal discipline. chairman king and members of the committee, thank you for this opportunity to present some testimony to you. i have a more complete statement that i ask be included in the record and i'm happy to answer your questions. >> thank you, madam secretary. the issues seem to evolve week by week. last week, was the the alda saer case in texas which shows we still have vulnerabilities in the student visa program. following the 9/11 attacks we passed the program to deploy sere to hire visa posts. the quires the dhs personnel be assigned to saudi arabia. can you describe for us the role that dhs plays in analyzing the visa applications, how and if that overlaps the state department and are there any
lessons learned from last week? is there anything that could be prevented in the future as far as addressing our visa procedures? >> mr. chairman, i think that case is a good news story. i'll tell you why. first of all, the individual involved entered the country first time on a student visa, attended college, went back to saudi arabia, and then was issued a second student visa. there was, to my knowledge, no derogatory information discovered either by dhs the state department in connection with that. returned to the united states. i.c.e., what i.c.e. does with students who are here on these kinds of visas is it monitors them on a continuing basis, and through at monitoring, discovered a suspicious activity report of unusual banking activity by this individual.
it notified the fbi. the fbi and i.c.e. then pursued an investition and of course that led to ultimately the arrest of the individual involved. i think what the case illustrates is the need to have a layered approach here. at any one time, you may not have derogatory information about an individual. it may develop susequently. so what we have been working on and developing in our country is we want students to come from other lands. there's a huge benefit for the united states in that. we also need to attend to our security concerns. this kind of layered approach allows us to do that. >>ithout discussing the details of the case, because obviously, it's -- the case is still proceeding, but was he found beuse of what i.c.e. detected with the questionable bank transactions or was it because of the person in the
chemical supplier company notified the fbi that he was asking to have the material sent to his home? >> my understanding is that the first notice to the fbi was from i.c.e., from the sar report. >> would that have been sufficient, do you think? i'm not trying to find fault. can there be any lessons learned from this? what could be possible also is i.c.e. did learn of this, something was done but there was not sufficient follow-through because my understanding was, if you had gotten the fen no, the bomb would have been ready to go. i.c.e. made the initial discovery, still he was in a position to possibly launch an attack. >> i think that illustrates why you have to have many layers in the homeland security arena. it's why the see something-say something campaign has been instituted by the department to go national, because we want individuals and companies, particularly those that run things like chemical plants to know if they see something
unusual, they need to report it as well. it increases the likelihood that we will pick up something before an act can be completed. so we give cdit there. we give credit to i.c.e. we give credit to the fbi. they all ultimately were converging on one individual. >>ou may have violated chairman longman's copyright on layer. he started using that term awhile ago. just one final question on deblock. in light of the president's announcement that he supports the allocation the d-block, do you anticipate your department getting involved in that effort and doing all that can be done to work with congress and the administration to get it through? >> yes. yes. in fact, we were -- the dhs and the department of justice were heavily involved in the decision to stop the auction of the d-block and reserve it for public safety. we anticipate being involved on
an ongoing basis. >> ha there been continuing controversy in congress. right now, i think we are getting closer to getting the votes we might need. senator rockefeller, senator lieberman. any assistance you can give to us. i recognize the gentleman from mississippi. >> thank you very much, . chairman. madam secretary, ecently, gao released its high risk list. once again, many of the processes of integration and transformation at dhs have been identified. in light of this budget, the new initiatives that you are putting forward, will you be able to address some of those issues that ao highlighted? >> yes, mr. chairman, the gao
report, it was -- it had good and bad. it had good in the sense that it recognized a number of the transformational management activities that have been under way over the past years as we work to integrate these 22 agencies into one large department. it also pointed out, as you note, some other areas where we need to put in some continued effort. i believe that those efforts will continue under the president's dget. i will say that if the hcr that was passed by the house becomes effectively the fy-12 budget as well, that is going to have some impacts on the department both on front line operations but also on the management side. let's take maritime cargo. as you know, congress some time ago passed 100% screening
mandate and there have been issues around it. you testified last year that you couldn't meet it. some of us are convinced that it was a congressional mandate and we want to know how and what you plan to do to address this congressional mandate that's obviously you won't be able to meet. >> yes, representative thompson and i could give you a very, very long answer, but let me try to keep it brief. first of all, i think the mandate was constructed at a time before we had really a mature understanding of what that meant and what the possibilities were or were not in that regard. one of the this that's
happened over the past eight years as we have developed a much more mature understanding of what homeland security means and how we link with national security and with issues around the world. and what sounds easy and foolproof in the end turns out to be neither easy nor foolproof. that is really what's happened with that requirement. so what we are doing is working on an entire global cargo security initiative that involves the international maritime organization. it involves the international aviation organization. it involves the world customs organization. really dealing with the point of time from which a good enters the global stream of commerce to the time it reaches its end user and different things along that entire chain that need to be done to make sure that cargo remains secure, is secure at the outset, remains secure through the streamf commerce. we would be happy to brief you
in greater detail on that work. >> well, i really would like to have it, because it was not congress passing the mandate. we didn't say to the department look at it, tell us what you think. i think part of the discomfort for some of us ishat if congress decides, in its wisdom to say do it, then we expect the agencies to follow the congressional mandate. obviously, that was not followed. i know you inherited part of it, but nonetheless, the mandate's there. >> the statute also provides, however, that the secretary can extend the time. as we have been doing that, we've been keeping the committee briefed and we will keep you briefed, representative thompson. >> that's fine. i think ultimately, by extending the time, i think the scanning
mandate would be something that some of us would expect to be followed. i yield back. >> thank you, member thompson. i'll recognize members of the committee for five minutes for questions. as i said at the beginning, the secrety has to leave before noon, i would ask the members observe the five minute rule and not go over in accordance with the committee rules, i plan to recognize members who were present at the start of the hearing by seniority on the committee. recognize the gentleman from california. >> i thank the chairman. i hope that caution wasn't just directed at me. i will try to stay within the five minutes. first of all, madam secretary, i want to thank you for going forward with things such as see something-say something. i think that makes a good deal of sense and gets us in a cooperative venture, if you
will, with the citizens of this country. i think we needo go forward. the context in which you are appearing here today is set really by the chief of the -- the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff last year who said the greatest threat to security is our fiscal irresponsibility. he told us even from his vantage point, we have to get our fiscal house in order. that puts con statements on all of us, democrat, republican or legislative branch. i want to applaud you with your answer with the last question, with respect to the 100% cargo screening or scanning. we need to do with a what works. we need to use the layered approach. the height of insanity is to keep doing the same thing over and over again and expect different results. if you run into bumps on the road in doing 100% cargo screening, the idea that you are going with the layered approach with the entire supply chain
makes eminent sense, at least to this member and i thank you for it. i would like to ask you a question in these tough budget times about a couple of the priorities you have set. one for whic i would applaud you is your fiscal year 12 request for cyber security it. appe appears to be the largest increase in the category of nppd. i think that makes emanate sense. maybe you can tell us exactly why you had th as a priority. on the other hand, i had a concern on the customs and border patrol where it appears in the 2012 budget justification documents that your border patrol plans to only maintain the current 1,007 miles under control for the re of fiscal year 2011 and 2012. on the one hand i think there's an appropriate emphasis given to
cyber security. on the other hand,t doesn't appear, at least from my reading of your budget documents a similar stress on the area of border control. maybe you can talk to those two things, please. >> well, yes. with respect to cyber, we have identified that as one of the five key mission areas of the department. one of the things i've tried to do as the secretary is to take all the myriad agencies, departments, whatever, that were merged into dhs with all of the hundreds of missions that they have, but to consolidate into five major mission areas. we have identified cyb. the point of fact is that between dhs and dod, we possess 95% of the cyber responsibilities in the united states government. we need to protect the civilian side of the federal networks from attack. we need to accelerate the deployment of ieinstein 3 which is the program we're using to do that. there are a whole other host of
activities we need to undertake including increasing our cyber workforce. is is a key need of the department and the federal government at large as to have more cyber competent individuals working for us. opm, office of personnel management has given us direct hire authority. we're actively going out, going to your state to try to recruit individuals to come intohe public service and to help us out. with respect to the border. i think you're referring to a gao report on operational control. i think what your question presumes is that a, that report is correct, and b, that the president's budget is not the most aggressive in history with respect to the border. as i've explained before, operational control is used and referred to in that gao report as a very narrow term of art. it doesn't include, for example, force multipliers like all the technology and infrastructure that's been deployed to the
border. if the president's budget is adopted, we will have more border patrol agents at the border than at any time in our nation's history. they will be accompanied, however, by a technology laydown that will greatly expand their ability to make great use of their man hours and as you also know, the president has also sent the national guard to the southwest border. in contrast, however, i must say that i'm very troubled by the house concurrent resolution for 11, particurly if it becomes the basis for the 12 budget, because it does not fully protect those expansions in cvp and i.c.e. in all of their operations that we have seen under the president's budget. i would ask the house as it gets us hopefully out of continuing resolution land and into a real budget for fy-11 and looks at fy-12 that we reexamine those
priorities. >> the gentle lady fm california? >> thank you mr. chairman and thank you madam secretary for being before us again. there are several issues i want to ask you about. the first one is about the urban area security initiative grants which you know are to do basically mutual benefit for regions of the united states. i know that in 2012, you've increased the president's budget 33 million, but the republicans cut out 67 million from the program during the cr debate these past two weeks. can you explain to me h detrimental it is to, if you think the uatsi program is something we sould have, or how
detrimental it is, if -- two weeks ago they cut 87 million from it. if we continue to see those sorts of cuts, what that would do with your local partnerships that you're trying to do from a terrorist or natural disaster situation. >> representative sanchez, the house concurrent resolution, as i understand it actually ends up cutting a billion dollars from fema grants. that's troublesome in a number of areas. i think it reflects perhaps a different philosophy of what grants are for. whathese grants are for are to make sure we have a homeland security architecture that works. that means states and lowali y localalities have to have certain bases of operation. i mentioned fusion centers in my
opening statement. what these are are a network of 72 centers. they are relatively new, only a few years old. most of the things in the department are relatively new. what they are designed to be are federal, state, local co-located entitieshere information, intelligence from washington, d.c. at the secret and above level can be transmitted as well as trends and tactics, techniques, things that we are seeing as well as realtime threat informationso it can get quickly out to the country and also so we can receive information back about tactics and trends and things they see. let me give you a practical example. the zauzzy case. he was an individual who was participating in a plot to come into the new york subways and blow up the subways. he was going to use explosives that used a lot of hydrogen peroxide as part of the basis
for those. one of the things you can do to a fusion center ismmediately go out and look around the country for unusually large purchases of that material by individuals who normally don't purchase it. so the fusion centers really become a way to share intel across the country and come back. part of our budget allows us to place our own intelligence analysts in the fusion centers, which is a way also to increase that capability around the country outside of the beltway. these grants serve a lot of different purposes and they begin, however, with the philosophy that we need a comprehensive homeland security architecture at the state and local level. >> thank you ms. secretary. i believe obviously working with my local, state, as well as the federal agencies that protect areas like orange county, where we have disneyland and some of the largest entertainment venues
where we're 25 minutes drive away from the port of los angeles and long beach. the list goes on and on. let me ask you about the u.s. visit program, becausehe last time you were before us, i asked you about that. i see that in the present budget, the program has been cut by 19%. of course, i'm very interested about this visa overstay issue, which has a lot of implications like with visa waiver programs and of course when we saw the 9/11 people, a lot of the terrorists overstayed their visa. my question is if we're cutti the moneys to visa -- to the visit program,ow are we going to get this exit piece done with respect to the u.s. visit program? >> well, that again probably requires a longer answer than i have time right here, but let me
just respectfully suggest that again, we'll provide you with some supplemental information, but a biometric exit program fo a country like the united states where you have air, sea and huge land borders, is going to be extraordinarily expensive to accomplish. and our view is that at this point in time, th is something that we could better accomplish right now in terms of detecting or picking up overstays by making sure that i.c.e. is properly funded to go ahead and pick up people. you have to look, i think at i.c.e. and u.s. visit and identify all of those things together. >> time has expired. the gentleman from alabama, mr. rogers will be followed by ms. jackson lee, ms. mccaul. >> thank you, mr. chairman and secretary, thank you for bng
here. i always look forward to having your feedback. recently, i had chief fisher in here from my subcommittee, and was -- we had a problemn coming up with the definition that dhs is using for determining whether or not they've secured the southwest border. the term is defined in the law, operational control is defined as being the prevention of all unlawful entries into the united states, including entries by terrorists, other unlawful aliens, instruments of terrorism, narcotics and other contraband. when we asked chief fisher to define operational ontrol, he had the department's definition which was different. why don't you all use the definition that's set out in deral law? >> well, representative, i think you'll find troughout federal law different definitions of different things where security is concerned. what we areoncerned about is making sure the border region
both northern and southern are safe and secure. we have some key concerns there. we've been making a lot of progress, as you know. the president has put more resources on the border, the southwest border than at any time in our nation's past, numbers that need to go up, are going up are going down. we want to continue that progress. i would say that the house concur enlts resolution, by the way, again, if that's what w have to live under is very problematic in that regard. >> i understand. i do want to point out that i'm talking about theecure fence act of 2006. that is a pretty specific federal statute that deals with that definition. it seems to me that the department ought to be adhering to that definition when trying to determine whether or not they've actually achieved operational control. another thing. i.c.e., as you know, i've talked to you in the past about my concerns that we have not adequately funded i.c.e. to
increase the number of i.c.e. agents in the field, particularly when you look at what we've done with cvp, there's been no significant increase in i.c.e. agents. but recently -- early this week, i met with some i.c.e. folks about the detention of people here in the country that are found to be illegal. and was surprised to find if somebody in alabama is detained, we have two jails in nor alabama where they're held until they can be taken into new orleans for a hearing. which is the closest emigration judge. my question is, why don't we have an immigration judge in alabama, because just the transportation cost alone are just unbeliable? to that end, i've spoken with chairman adderholt. he and i are going to try to work to get an immigration judge in alabama and we're going to
work with lamar smith, to that end. my question is would you support that? >> we certainly would look at that, because you're right to identify the transportation costs and delay, because then you take an agent o the line to do the transportation. i think your question also illustrates when you're talking about immigration, we really go from cvp and i.c.e. to justice. it's a system. from a jurisdictional standpoint, there's a break. this committee looks all the way up to apprehension and detention and everything else is over on the justice side of the ledger. that's where the judges would found. >> i'm going to work tohat end. i would like f you to be supportive in that effort to the extent you can be. >> thank you. >> finally, my staff and i have been engaged with tsa using cr
funds for the procurement of canine funds? are you on board with procuring those assets? >> we are, but i will tell you that as we look at the fy-11 hcr, it has a big cut for canine teams. that also is problematic. as we look at what our fy-11 budget ought to be and fy-12, i think you and i both agree that canines should be maximized. >> thank you very much. i yield back. >> the gentle lady from tes. >> i thank you both and the ranking member. m madam secretary, let me thank you for your service and the department oholand security for their service. we interact with your team every day of our lives of the and recognize that you are on the front line. i would almost say that we are all working to put ourselves out
of business but we realize the challenges that we're facing. let me quickly lay the oundwork for my questions and just, first of all, thank you for the 2012 budget and your commitment to federal air marshals surge after the christmas day bombing incident. i join, my good friend from alabama. we are canine team supporters and hope that we can work against hr-1, i want to work against it in terms of those potential cuts. i believe you wereuestioned extensively about the passenger security fee. i think most americans would accept that fee. every time i'm traveling through airports, i see a sense of comfort in recognition that they are being secured by the enhanced services that they see. i am concerned, as i notice the hr-1 just jumped from your budget 2012 to hr-1 and saw you
would actually lose under this budget some 50% in technology, tactical communications on the border security, you would lose some 800 positions under border security and what disturbs me is the ait machines, you would lose a nuer of them. i'm concerned about that and i wish to ask these questions if i might. i'm just going to ask them and yield to you. the hr-1, $1.1 billion in reduction, i would like an impact from you losing that money in our present state, i think most people don'tealize this is to finish out what you had already committed to. also, do you support the sition of mr. pistol on ssp? and i'm reminded of how we were rushing around aft 9/11 to find out what happened. i also would appreciate, i asked you a question in your last meeting with us about the
minority personnel, whether you have achieved human services officer that looks at that and looks at procurement and lastly, this is an issue that has struck me. i am a supporter of comprehensive immigration reform. you might want to comment on maybe how that would even save us money, but i would like to know how i.c.e. might interface and be of help to local law enforcement. i have lost two alleged criminals. one drunk driver killed two teenagers and one ultimately committed suicide under 15 because she thought she should have died in the accident. that person was allowed to go home. they left for nepal. the last three or four days, a woman who has nigerian relatives was a caretaker for seven babies, four died in a fire. the allegation is she left the home and went shopping and these
babies died. she was not picked up and she left for nigeria. it seems to me that maybe our local enforcement could interact with i.c.e., and say we have suspicions can you hold this person. but if i could get in a discussion on that. we're outraged. t nepal person has not been found. i appreciate your commentary. might i add my sympathies to mr. zapata and his partner and we have to do better for our i.c.e. officers overseas. madam? >> with respect to cooperation between i.c.e. and local law enforcement, i think a key tool is our secure communities program. if they make an arrest, a localality makes an arrest and they have secure jas, when the fingerprints are run, they are run against the immigration date
bases to determine legal presence. if an individual is not legally present, there's a transfer to i.c.e. after whatever criminal punishment merited is carried out. that is why the budget continues funding into fy-12 for secure communities. we would be almost 100%omplete by the end of fy-12. with respect to hiring and diversity in hiring, we have been aggressively moving in that direction, from ses and above positions, we have increased diversity hires by you 17.5% over the last year, which is a significant increase, and the percentage of overall employees who are members of ethnic minorities or who add to our diversity is well over -- i think i have an actual number. we've gone from 38% to 40.6% in
the last -- from january '09 to december 2010. soe're really moving aggressively on both of those fronts, the ses and the other positions within the department. >> the billion dollars out of hr-1 that you're losing? >> as i mentioned before, it will mean, because we're halfway through the fiscal year. hr-1, you almost have to multiply everything times two from a management perspective. i'm not sure everybody understands that, because we're already halfway into the year, that's what the practical impact is. but it will cut the number of ait machines we were intending to deploy by half. it will cut the number of portable explosive trace detection machines by half. it will cut the number of canine teams by almost two-thirds. i think it will result in longer wait times in airports for
passengers. it will cut funding for 250 i.c.e. agents along the southwest border. it will reduce the fema grants. i've already commented to that. it cuts science and technology research by 50%. if i might comment to that, people are always asking me, you know, when are we going to be able to keep our shoes on and take bottles of water on the planes and so forth? well, that's the kind of technology and science research that snt funds. those would be cut dramatically under hr-1. >> gentlemen from texas, mr. mccaul is recognized? >> thank you, mr. chairman. madam secretary, thank you very much for being here today. i want to express my sympathy to the family of agent zapata as i know you do as well and the survival of agent abala is nothing short of a miracle given what happened down there. i think it was an intentional
ambush, a bit of a game changer that they are targeting our guys down there, u.s. law enforcement. 83 rounds fired from this ak-47, and first, i want to thank you to the good work to ap prehend those suspects down there. the two agents were american diplomats, they have a u.s. diplomatic tag. i saw reports of the mexican army seem to be reporting what the zetas were saying in terms of mistaken identity. what is the position of this administration with respect to the claim that this was mistaken identity? >> representative mccaul, thank you for your expressions and your support on this matter. i think it would be inappropriate for meo comment
on the actual evidence that will come in. this obviously is a matter that is being prosecuted. my understanding is that it will be prosecuted in the united states, but again, those are decisions that are yet to come. >> and i appreciate that, but just on my own behalf, i'll take the eyewitness account of our agent over the zetas who have been apprehended any day. i hope the administration will back that eyewitness account. with respect to extradition, i'm gl you brought that up. is it the administration's position that we will be seeking extradition into the united states? >> yes. >> good news. and president calderon is in the united states. it's probably a good time to talk to him about that. before i get into the budget, one last question with respect to that shooting. i was surprised to find out that there was a 1990 agreement that
prohibits our officers from carrying weapons down in mexico. things have dramatically changed since 1990. there is a war going on as you know. it seems our agents should be armed if we're going to put them down there in harm's way. would u support a revision of that agreement? >> well, i think -- let me -- the issue of agents and arming is one that is something that probably should be discussed in a more classified setting than a public hearing. perhaps we can provide for that, mr. chairman, because it's an issue that involves not just mexico but some other countries as well. >> okay. i look forward to that as well. on the budget, i looked at the -- it has cvp decrease the border security fencing infrastructure and technology account by 300 million, from 800
million to 500 million, if what i have in front of me is correct. this is given to us by staff. do you know what happened to that account or whether the moneys have decreased? >> it's not -- no. what is happening is we're not buying spi now. spi net doesn't work. for the first -- tucson and the aho sectors, it was far enough along that we completed it, and given the topography there, it made sense but border wide it doesn't make sense. what the budget requires or what the budget buys is $242 million of technology that the border patrol agents can actually use. it's remote video surveillance equipment, it's mobile video equipment, a whole laundry list of things that our agents can actually use right now. >> that discrepancy is an cancellation of spi net it
appears. that money will still be used towards technology on the border? >> yes, there's a entire technology. >> i think that's critically important. in my state of texas, there's almost zero technology there. we took to the department of defense has been using. i think he was receptive to that idea. i commend you or i would ask that you look at deploying that type of technology all across the southwest border. i think technology is going to be the answer down there. then of course we need the manpower to respond to it. >> indeed. >> thank you so much. i yield back. >> the gentleman from texas. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank you and the ranking member for having this meeting. thank you, madam secretary for being with us. i want to extend my prayers and sympathies to the i.c.e. family, not only the immediate family but to the i.c.e. family here
also. he was from brownsville, and he was stationed in loredo. what i want to do is focus on the budget. when you look at all the accounts, i believe it's about $500 million impact cut to the cpp budget, could you tell us what the continued resolution of it passing as is, what sort of impact it would have on border security operations, and again look at all the accounts and tell us what sort of impact it would have on us? >> ell, we will give you a thorough list. as i said, it basically stops our progress in its tracks. if anything, reduces our ability to move ahead. as you know, we've been adding record amounts of agents and record amounts of technology, as representative mccaul just mentioned to our border, and i
anything, we're going to have to cut back. >> all right. and one of the things the american people have been saying, especially because of what's been happening across the river that we got to do more for border security, but with this $500 million cut, that stops the ogress you're referring to. isn't that correct? >> yes. what we want to do is continu to add to the border. our goal, as you know, is to have a safe and secure border zone, both for the public safety of our communities along the border, some of which you present, but also recognizing the amount of legitimate trade and travel that needs to traverse that border. if it's not safe and secure, it will impact the commerce. that impacts jobs. there are lots of ramifications for not continuing with the president's program. >> right. i think as mr. rogers mentioned a few minutes ago, a lot of people when they talk about
bordersecurity, they talk about adding the men and women in green, which is the border patrol which i support, but you got to have i.c.e. agents, other ents, men and women in blue which are the ones that guard our bridges, ports of entry, which are so important. and those are the areas especially trying to find the right border security with the right legitimate and balance of trade and tourism which is so important. loredo is the largest port. that's why the men and women are so important to us. i agree with mr. rogers we got to find the balance. in my opinion, the $600 million we added last year wch was prably the largest infusion of cash will be taken back by cutting at least $500 million from the cvb budget from all the advances we're trying to do. >> representative, if hr-1 becomes the basis for the fy 12 budget, that's really the
concern, because it will not annualize all of the additions that congress has put down at the border. >> i think you hit it right that we're talking about seven months. it's not a full year. this is just addressing part of a remaing year which makes a greater impact. >> indeed. >> i got about a minute and 20 seconds. let me ask you what about the tension beds. hr-1 doesn't help maintain the 33,400 detention beds we need. when we catch somebody here without the proper documentation, we can't catch them and release them. we got to detain them before we send them off. how does that head the detention bed needs that we have? >> again, we think we need 33,400 detention beds. we don't need 33,400 every day. it fluctuates a little bit. we think you needo have a
constant presence of 33,400 to support the removal of all the individuals we seek to remove from the country this year and next year. in a way we're caught, because if you fund the detention beds at 33,400 and the officers necessary to guard those beds, the cuts can come out of one ple. that means the officers that are out in the field. i don't think either makes sense. you got to have the officers in the field and you have to have the officers in the detention center. >> i got 11 seconds. just real quickly, last time you were in loredo, you said it would be a good idea to have a fusion center in loredo. we don't have one and we ask you to consider having a fusion center there. thank you very much, chairman. >> three seconds over. gentleman from minnesota, mr. pratt. >> thank u, mr. chairman. i too want to extend
appreciation for all the homeland securit officers and their families for what they do on a daily basis. i actually had homeland security credentials as a federal flight deck program when we started that program. that was many years ago, but thank you very much for all the homeland security for what they do on a daily basis. i agree with you very much and appreciate you working with this cr. unfortunately, you're at the tail end of this whip. it's been going back and forth and i appreciate you as a manager being able to work through this. i'll also assure you that this congress, the 112th will provide a budget for you that will be able to give you stability to make sure that you can make the critical decisions that you need to make in the future, ensuring we get the right money to the right missions to protect the homeland and people within the united states. thank you very much for that. one of the things i did want to ask you about is just
recently -- >> i'm going to write that down, by the way. >> you betcha. i want to make sure -- i just had a couple questions with regard to just recently you went over to afghanistan. >> yes. >> you were thinking about deploying agents over in afghanistan. can you expand upon that and why you think it'sness? >> yes, what we're doing. we have about 25 total ov there right now, but what we are engaged in is basically a training capacity building on the customs side with afghanistan so that they can develop their own custom service, particularly at their big lamp ports like a port between afghanistan and pakistan, governing who goes back and forth but the ability to collect customs revenues so they have someevenue for their government to exist upon as we continue to convert from a military to civilian presence. >> thank you for that. i take it it is a creditical
mission as well. thank you for that. also, being an airline pilot, i took a look at the aviation passenger curity fee. you're planning to increase that by a buck 50 for reimbursement. in the reports that i read, that's basically to fund tsa costs that have risen by like 400%. >> that's true. >> can you tell me why we have had such a dramatic increase in cost in the tsa? >> because the threat to aviation has increased and also because the amount of security we have to supply now in airports and aviation is a very layered approach. it means behavior detection officers, canine, explosive detection equipment, it means the conversion from magna tom r tommers to the personnel. what's happened with the fee is the fee has never been increased. it was established in 2002 and
has never been increased at all. it doesn't cover- it was intended to cover the cost of security for aviation. when it was enacted, that was congress' intent. because the fee habit gone up, we have a huge gap, it's about a $600 million gap between what we will pay for security in the aviation environment in '12 and fees. we believe it's time for congress in this fiscal environment, we will work with the authorizing committees, like this one, work with the appropriations committees, but it is time to increase that fee. >> so you're saying basically the fees are going towards personnel and capital investment? uld that be a fair statement? >> yes. >> the other thing is being a former federal flight deck officer, where do you see the federal flight deck officer program? i know it's under tsa. do you consider that a vital portion in our layered defense in terrorism for aircraft?
>> yes. >> that was a great answer. i appreciate that? >> i'm trying to help the committee with time. >> i you appreciate it, with my 51 seconds left, i will yield, sir. >> in the 45 seconds i have, on a serious matter, especially in view of the shootings in germany yesterday, does dhs have any information whether this was a lone wolf attack or a link to al qaeda or any other organization? >> let me just say that i think that matter is under investigation and with lead by germanhorities because it occurred in germany. any information about that should be released in a classified setting. >> if you could let us know any data or information, we would really areciate that? >> yes. >> thank you, madam secretary. the gentleman from michigan, mr. clark. >> thank you, mr. chairman, secretary naup tapolitano, i th
you for your knowledge for handling the threats our country is facing and considering proposals from people like us in the legislature. my concerns are about the security of the detroit sector border in particular and about the northern border. i've got three questions. my first is about the president's 2012 proposal and it's regarding the recent canada vision agreement that was entered into between the u.s. and canada and if you had thoughts on how that agreement could better supplement security in the northern border? >> well, i think that agreement is a landmark agreement for a number of reasons, but one of them is because it recognizes the need to have a perimeter security around canada so that we begin utilizing some of the same criteria for who can enter
canada as they enter the united states, as we begin to understand the need to exchange information about travelers and the like. that willave an impact o the actual physical border such as the border at detroit because we will have the ability, i think, to have equivalent information and equivalent standards and the like. that will facilitate, i believe, the legitimate trade and travel that needs to be able to cross, particularly at the detroit area. >> thank you, secretary. my other two questions go to the impact that the house pass a continuing resoluon would have on border security, as i mentioned to you before, the detroit sector is the busiest international border of crossing. huge population center, international airport, large regional water system and because of our declining state and local revenue, our first responders really don't have the
capacity to protect us, and in my opinion, i believe that sector warrants a tier one consideration rather than the current tier one status. i appreciate your willingness to listen to me earlier this month on that issue. one concern i have in the house passed cr is that it limits the urban area security initiative funding to the top 25 urban centers, and do you think this restriction will impact your department's ability to protect urban areas? >> well, i think the intent of that provision is to make sure that our largest, highest risk areas do not get shorted on grant moneys and without commenting on that, let me just say overall, hr-1 by cutting
almost a billion dollars out of the grant process, it's going to affect everybody. you're going up and down the list of cities, so without commenting further on the amendment that was passed, again, nobody willescape unscathed, if that budget remains the budget. >> thank u. my last question deals with the border securityencing infrastructure and technology account that's within cvp. the current cr made a huge cut to that. what type of impact would that have on the security of the detroit sector border, if you have any opinion on that? >> i don't know that i've broken it out sector by sector to that level of detail, but it would certainly limiour ability to invest in new technology. i think a number of members on both sides hav recognized you
can't do this job with manpower alone. we need to be able to deploy the best available technology that our agents can use the field. >> thank you, secretary. i yield back, mr. chairman. >> thank you, the gentleman from virginia is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman and secretary napolitano, thank you very much for your testimony today. i would like to just share with you a comment that was made to me by a local sheriff and just get your perspective on it. he commented that the sheriff's office was required by law to notify i.c.e. every time that they have an illegal immigrant, very rarely does i.c.e. respond back, if they are or areot an illegal alien, however it would make no differenceecause they would not put a hold on them anyway. this is due to funding problems because i.c.e. does not have enough beds to act on the reported aliens. the court process takes 18 months to determine whether or not that person is indeed an illegal alien. this would require more cells,
prosecutors, clerks and attorneys and no one would fund what it actually costs to deport all the illegal aliens. the local sheriff's office does not have the resources to do i.c.e.'s job. i've learned in life there are always two sides and there's more to this than maybe what's here. would you kindly comment on that and give some perspective? >> well, yes, representative, and i would kind of like to know which sheriff we're talking about. i think i actually do know. but in any event, we work very closely with the sheriffs and police chiefs around the country. one of the key challenges w have is, you know, estimates vary, but estimates vary from between 8-12 million people who are in thisountry legally. plain fact of the matter is that if you look at the cost of removing a individual, you
can -- the congress has funded the remov of about 400,000 a year. we have prioritized in that 400,000 to say that the number one priority is for those who are convicted of crimes. that's why the president's budget expands what's called secure communities and puts it in the jails of our country which are operated by the sheriffs and the prisons which are operated by state bureau prisons because that is a way to make sure that those that are committing crimes in addition to being in the country illegally are being removed through the immigration process. so in that 400,000, last year, we removed over 200,000ho were criminal aliens which was a record number by a large percentage. that's what secure communities enables us to do. now, i don't know whether this particular sheriff has a jail
where a secure communities is not yet installed. if it is, it's something we could get that information from and work with him on. that's probably the easiest way to deal with his base concern. >> thank you for your response. you know, i've come to this body as an entrepreneur, business owner, first time elected official. i've been struck by frankly the tangled web of reporting relationships and the complexity of the committee structure and the organizational chart of the house. i'm sure that like every organization, it could be refined and improved upon. would you kindly give us your perspective on the number of committees that oversee, homeland security and how that might be streamlined? >> well, i appreciate that question. this is something the chairman and i have discussed if oversight is a you blessing, i guess you could say dhs is
particularly blessed. when we were created, what happened was a number of departments were merged into dhs and we all carried with -- everyone carried with them their committees. none of the committees were reorganized really to match the new department. so the end result is we report to 108 committees of the congress, the overwhelming ma jorltd of those are committees and subcommittees of the house. in the 111th congress, we testified 280 times. 140 times with component heads who had to come down and testify. we provided 3,900 briefings to congress, and we are required to file something around 425 written reports a year. it's a huge manpower drain on the department. we would like to take some of those resources and put them
into operations, particularly, given the fiscal environment we are in and we will support any effort by the committee to hel us achieve that goal. >> thank you. i would want to join you in that effort. i believe the committee generally would. thank you for your testimony. i yield back. >> i can safely say this is one issue where the secretary, the ranking member and the secretary agree 100%. it's absolutely disgraceful. the gentle lady from new york, my colleague, ms. clark. >> mr. chairman, how are we doing questions? mr. davis was here, i was he, several members. it seems like we're getting out of order. >> mr. chairman, no problem. i yield. >> fine. >> ms. davis, you're recognized for five minutes. >> thank you very much,
mr. chairman, and thank you madam secretary for being here and for your testimony. i also want to express the sentiments conveyed by my colleagues in reference to the imminent danger that all of our personnel involved in homeland security and other aspects of government face on a daily basis, a so we appreciate their services. there has been a great deal of progress i relationship to surface ansportation, but i also think that buses still remain pretty easy easy targets. what funded options do you think might help sustain our security for this sector of transportation? >> well, representative, that's something -- because buses are operated p ed primarily at the
municipal level, you would find funding for that. there are transit security grants, but also other sorts of grants that can be used for transportation security. so you would find those prima primarily under fema and the grant programs there. >> i noticed that the transportation security grant program has been reduced to $200 million below the current levels. does vhs, has a way, any thoughts about how you can help again with the security needs of this type of public transportation in local areas? >> what we have recommended congressman, is that the number of grant programs under fema be
consolidated from 17 to 9. it will reduce overhead in terms of how many applications they have to submit. and making sure that gran that remain are broad enough to include local decisions. if that's where they want to put security money, they can put it into the bus system, whatever. >> i think we've made a tremendous amounof progress in this area, but i note that the president's request funding calls for an increase in bdo agents that will bring us up to over 3,000. what's the human rights and private rights protections are we dealing with in order to assure that these individuals
are not -- that's right. not racially profiling or etically. >> yes. i think this is very important. given the -- a very important constitutional safeguards americans have. but our bdo program has been developed with internal oversight, the training has been reviewed and approved. we'reonstantly looking at what best practices, are so that we do not fall into the trap of profiling, which by the way, does not give -- you want to do intelligence based, you want to be looking for tactics, techniques and behaviors, not t
ethnicity or race. >> do you support the decision not to expand the stp program for private airport screeners and do you think this is good for security? >> i think administrator vestal who was former deputy director of the fbi has made the right call here. for several reasons. one, is he wants to maintain flexibility to surge resources when he needs to and there are issues there when talking about privatization of th screening pulation. secondary, the studies that have been -- you know, they still have toeet tsa requirements in terms of what they do. they are more expensive than simply maintaining it within the tsa structure and that's been issue and thirdly, it's
important to recognize that when you privatize, you still have unions. several of the privatized workforces are indeed also unionized. >> thank you very much. thank you, mr. chairman and i yield back. >> the gentleman from missouri is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you. >> no, you don't. thank you very much. >> thank you, secretary for being here. back in december, you announced that additional dhs officers were being to afghanistan to assist in border control and customs. would you please further explain the value of having dhs placed overseas and expand on some of the work done by dhs officials afghanistan and other countries around the world? >> homeland security has a
footprint that is around the world. we have a about two dozen employees in afghanistan. they are training customs and customs officers so that afghanistan can have its own customs force and also learn h to or exchange how we operate major ports of entry like the ports between pakistan and afghanistan. we also have employees around the world at international airports where there are last points of departure for the united states. we have immigration officials at embassies around the world such as rio for example to help do security check ons individuals seeking visas. we have individuals around the world who are working on protecting against human trafficking into the united states. protection of our intellectual property from the united states. there's an extensive
international force laid down fr t department. >> so the employees that we have other there are not training themselves. they are doing the trainin >> correct. >> okay. that's not how i interpreted it. you also mentioned that more rder patrol agents than ever would be employed under this budget and black hawk helicopters are becoming an effective -- the customs and border patrol have a great need of black hawk helicopters and carrying out their mission. are you aware of this and does your budget request reflect this? >> yes, but it reflects other kinds of air support besides helicopters. fixed wing support. so that we have and want to have total air coverage, particularly on the southwest border all the
way from el centro through texas. >> the agents in contact with us expressing an interest, they feel that the black hawk is probably their best. i ow that it's surplus equipment and when they bought the black hawks surplus, so if we can look at that for them, i'd appreciate it. >> certainly. the black hawks have many uses. there is a great demand for black hawks by the department of defense, by others, by us. they are greatly in demand around the world. >> one other thing. small business, like mr. riggle, come with a small business background. ran my own business, 30 years. real estate broker, a title company in our district in the seveh recently had $400,000 stolen, sent to pakistan through cyber and the secret service has
jurisdiction over these crimes i understand, but what they do, they came and emptied their bank account. their holding money for real estate closings. secret service has jurisdiction over these crimes. how does the president's budget help protect our small business from these types of crime where they can empty out bank accounts, e money goes to pakistan. is in anything in the budget to help or give small businesses solace? >> first, numbe one, i'd have to know more about the facts to say definitively the secret service has jurisdiction, but the present's budget includes a great increase for cybersecurity on the civilian side. that means the protection on the civil side of the federal government and our intersection with we key sectors like the banking sector.
in terms of how they protect they're own cyber networks. the government doesn't own the banking structure. that's owned by the banks themselves. they have their own cyber protection. we are workg with them as to what that protection entails, so let us know when they've been hacked into andunds have been stolen. and issues like that. so the president's budget greatly increases the amount available to us for cyber protection generally. >> thank you again r for being here today and fitting us in your schedule. i have no time to yield back, but if i did, i would. >> mrs. richardson is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you for coming as always and your work in this area, i think when you look at the history of the secretaries in this area has been really commendable, so thank you. i want to join in with chairman
thompson in asking for the briefing on the security piece and also, i want to reference the question i asked a couple of weeks ago about everything on continuity of government. i'm not referencing agencies. i'm talking about with elected officials and how w respond and assist if and when a zdisaster occurs. thirdly, i have observed one of the new coast guard cutter response vehicles. there was an l spill in my district last week and i saw the 45. the able ility to navigate from side to side, the ability to stop on a dime, it just seemed like we' really finally getting to the point where we can be as good as the bad guys, so congrats on that effort. number one, i want to talk about the trade agreements. i asked you last time had your department had an opportunity to work with ambassador kirk toee
if we can engage some of these cargo screening issues because when i asked you about two years ago, you said the reason we couldn't was because we needed all this local cooperate ration. have you had an opportunity to work with ambassador kirk to make sure we canevolve these issues? >> to date, i have not yet been involved with ambassador kirk >> when can i expect that? >> let me look into it and i'll get back to you as soon as possible. >> thank you. my second question has to do with the reallocation of programs. it's my understanding that the tier one level has changed from five cities to ten. that haso do with drops in funding. i wanted to ask if you would consider relooking at that and consider why a change has occurred. one of the great things about your department is that you view things based on their merit and
significance and not getting into the political fights in washington. if you can get back, that would be helpful. >> yes. >> thank you. number three, i wanted to talk about cargo inspection. one of my colleagues said the layered effect and all of that, i admit, it's kind of a personal issue because it's flektive of my district. i would venture to argue that in terms of traveling by air, we use the same systems. you look on the computer. you're checking who the people are and all of that, but everyone isn't just simply walking through the airport. we have a layer of inspection that occurs at the airport that you have to go through. i want to echo my concerns as the chairman did that i'm just really concerned of whe we are and i realize the chatter doesn't raise to the level as you're dealing with aviation. i get all of that. but all we need is one problem
and suddenly, things will change. you were quoted as saying you are looking to extend the deadline to july 2014th. do you see implementing this program? >> i'm hopeful that we can persuade the congress that the statute itself is not the best way to secure the global supply chain and that there are better ways and that we are engaged in those. given the existing statute, given the configuration of ports around the world, the expense of some of the equipment associated only by focusing on what happens as the ports as opposed to the entire supply chain, by focusing on one area, we really don't fully get to the goal. i think we always share, which is to make sure that material enteri
entering the united states is safe. i think this is going to have to be an area where we continue to work with the congress and the committee moving forward. >> i have one last question. would you be open then to at least working with us? since i've been here in the last three years, it seems like we're at the same point. you say, i want to do it the way i've been doing it. could we all get together in maybe a working session and kind of talk about our concerns and come to a compromise instead of us just kicking the football back and forth? yeah, i know we've briefed the committee multiple times, but we would be happy as always to work with the committee. >> mr. chairman, could i have an additional 30 seconds? there was an oil spill in my district and i was not notified by dhs or anyone. i read it in the newspaper. so, what i would like to talk about as i said is continuity of government of what, and i'm
willing to work with you. it's a passion of mine i see as a huge weakness from hurricane katrina and so many other areas, but i still don't think we've mastered how do we engage this end of the rail in these disasters, so i uld like to work with you on that. >> and the gentleman dunk is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for coming back before this committee and i reviewed in the written statements that you gave us the six identified department homeland security missions and i appreciate you breaking that out for us. last month, this committee had the opportunity to discuss the southern border situation mainly with the chief fisher and at that time, i read the definition of operational control from the secure defense act of 2006 in
which the congress defined it as unlawful entries to the united states including by terrorists, instruments of terrorism, narcotics and other contraband. this definition has brought more to the forefront with the understanding that hezbollah is in cahoots with the cartel and i'm concerned as many americans are using smuggling routes of the cartel to bring god knows what io this country the customs and border control is publishing data saying that only 44% of the border is under control and arizona is suing the federal government. chief fisher stated they had acceptable level of operational control. means that we control who enters this country. on february 11th, a arizona sheriff, 34-year law enforcement
veteran, he said this. i can't stand publicly and endorse a political initiative part of this. whose county boards mexico in the southeast area. i can't stand upsi side by side with people who say this border is safe when it's not. this came a few da after the commissioner came to arizona to meet with sherif to discuss security. he stated that the administration was seeking sell the belief to american people that the border is safe and secure as part of a publicity campaign. those areis words. so, my question for you this morning is just a further understanding of what chief fisher and this administration and your office means when they talk about operational control. >> well, representative, as i've said many times, what we want to
have is a safe and secure border zone from san diego to brownsville and no one is more familiar with that arizona border than i am. i have worked that border as a prosecutor, a governor and now as the secretary since 1993, so i have a lot of years of experience with that border. there are lots of disagreements along that border, so i would note that not all sheriff rs in agreement with the sheriff. here's the point that i think is so important. we have a pathway forward on that border. it includes manpower, technology it includes infrastructure. a combination of all three. it also includes effective interior enforcement of our laws because the big driver of illegal immigration across that border is the opportunity to work in the united states, make a wage and send it back to
another country, primarily mexico right now. so that's what the pathway forward is. that's what the plan, the build-up has been. that's why the president has put more border patrol agents in his budget than anytime in our nation's history. that's why hess put more funding into technology, into i.c.e. that's why he has supported the largest deployment of technology of the southwest border in our nation's history. that's the pathway forward. that is the plan. unfortunately, the hr1 that passed here counterdikts that plan. goes backwards. it will take us back to where we were several years ago in terms of the actual resources that are available at the southwest border. so, i would respectfully ask this committee to look athe continuing resolution and look at our fy12 budget requests with those priorities in mind, but i
think we all hashare the same goal. to have a safe and secure border. to have a border through which legitimate travel and trade can go back and forth. we have huge land ports of entry along that border. mexico is the number one or two ading partner of i think 23 of our states, so that needs to be facilitated even as we increase the manpower and equipment lay down between the ports. >> i think our goal is the same. securing the border. determining what comes in here and thank you. >> time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. madam secretary, thank you for being here. last month, we had the chance to discuss the aftermath of a death of someone whose body was foun in massachusetts in the direct line oa commercial flight that left charlotte on its way to
logan. forensic experts have ascerta ascertained that mr. tisdale reached the -- hit by the wheel of the plane. to date, there's been no video surveillance that surfaced that could detail how mr. tisdale was able to breach airport operations and the case surely suggests that there may be a perimeter and air field access vulnerableties in other airports as well. this week, charlotte police department released a public version of their investigation. indeed, the police department's investigation, the local police department's investigation concluded there's the need to strengthen security in many respects. i'm glad this airport, a major hub working with t srsa to implement these new security measures and i'm sure you agree
that if there's a security breakdown from one airport, particularly a hub, that countless airports and cities are vulnerable. i had four questions i'd like to pose. the first, i'd like to make sure if possible that the members of this committee are briefed on the classified police department report they have issued. can you agree to work with our committee in that respect? >> yes, it is a matter that is still under investigation. that particular -- how that breach occurred. so i'm not at liberty to discuss in a public setting. but we'll explore how we go about sharing that. >> my understanding is that the local police investigation is complete from local officials. could you share that local police report with this committee? >> let me look into this. that was not my understanding, so let me look into that. >> thank you. ranking thompson and myse asked tsa to conduct its own
investigation into this matter now that the tsa has the report from the police department, when will tsa commence that investigation? >> i believe that tsa is -- their investigation is underway and in additio you know, we learn from all these incidents. every time there's a breach of whatever type, it is something we say okay, what happened here. is it repetition? what needs to happen systemically? you're right to point out the hub nature. it is something that reminds us you know, perimeter, which as you know, the tsa doesn't control. it has standards that airports are supposed to abide by with respect to perimeters. we're looking at all that afresh
in light of this incident. any kind of incident. >> let me try for the sake of time -- all the way along, i have a greater sense of urgency when a breach of this nature occurs that could threaten not only this airport, then i suppose many other people it seems, but to me, i'm a bit dumbfounded that that sense of urgency has resulted in quicker action. i have had the chance on my own to and with some assistance, to look atsome minimum standards, which i will not discuss because it's not great to discuss publicly what some of the minimum standards are at airports. but looking at those, i'm not satisfied. i don't think the public would be satisfied if they knew what those minimum standards are. my question to you igiven the
minimum standards and theact you just expressed there's another jurisdiction involved in implementing that, what can we give you for authority if necessary to make sure there's a seamless approach to making sure those prerimeter and tarmac ares are secure as they shoulbe because my view of what happened in charlotte clearly indicates there's a major breach. in a bank robbery, you can go back after someone did it and get evidence. there's no sign in the videotape that they can even locate how he did it, yet he did. so i see a major problem and we want to work with you as a committee to see if we can give you more authority, if necessary, more resources if that's necessary. but tome, this is a profound danger to the traveling public where the barrage at the gate, that's fine. we expect that.
but you look out the window and the tarmac and frankly, i don't feel safe when i'm take ago plane. >> time has expired. in consultation with the ranking member to have obvious consent limited to three minutes, the secretary can make it to the white house for a meeting with e president of mexico. >> we will work with the committee on this. >> thank you. >> time limit is not three minutes. gentleman from florida. >> thank you. i appreciate it. thank you. getting back to the student visa issue, describe the enhanced monitoring capabilities of sevis 2 as opposed to one. the system has been delays and not deplayed. schedule to be deployed last year. when do you think this will be imemented and what is i.c.e.
doing to monitor these individuals? >> i'll get back to you on the exact timeline, but as i mentioned earlier at this hearing, i.c.e. is able to monitor for suspicious activity and bank accnts and the like. that is indeed one of the ways in which this individual was detected. >> what is the current level of coordination information sharing between dhs and the state department recording student visa issuance and why didn't the president actually the budget's flat on the visa security units. and i know we've identified, i think there are 17 that are in place. i know we have close to 70. why is this not a priority of this administration? >> well, all issues of security
are a priority and all have a sense of urgency about them in referenc to the prior question. i think we put i.c.e. individuals into embassies upon agreement with the state department as to where they should go and we have requested funding for where we have agreements. >> okay. thank you. i'll yield back in the interest of time. thank you. >> thank you. and ms. clark is now recognized again. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman and so good to see you, secretary napolitano. thank you for your forthrightness in response to a very challenging budget. i'm sitting here just thinking of some of what our concerns are almost diametrically opposed to what has come forth in the cr and it's interesting to hear the conversation. but i have a question about cybersecurity. the national division is
planning to deploy five enstein monitors that should be used to detect intrusions on computer systems. if the resolution is adopted by congress and you don't receive your requested funds for 2011, how would it affect this mh need needed prugt and the request for 36 million? >> it will cause significant delay, reprentative. i think for the deployment of einstein three, we would see that move back at least two or three years in terms of our ability to deploy it. so and talk about an area where there's urgency, the cyber area has real urgency associated with it. we hope we can work with the congress to revisit that issue. >> that's an area of concerning that floats below the radar for
whatever reasons and it's been the take i guess, my father would say, to feel it before we realize how much of a priority it is. >> i want to move quickly to interoperaablety. the whole question of the deblock spectrum. there seems to be dualing opinions around the spectrum and i see that you and the president have been focused on reserving in support of the reallocation of the deblock to public safety. can you elaborate the level of involvement the committee has had and how you envision fiscal year 2012 budget helping the department of the office of emergency communications safety networks?
this is a key area in light of what we've seen and witnessed during the 9/11 terrorist event and hurricane katrina. >> yes, representative, wve been very involved since the edition was announced they wanted to auction off the deblock. we said, wait, there's a public safety issue involved here. i believe we will all be working with the congress on the changes needed for that. >> in closing, under the continuing resolution would lose $20 million for the acquisition this fiscal year. i'm coming around to the issue of securing the cities and how this would impact securing the city. can you share that with us?
>> yes, the budget would affect both of those things as i noted in my opening statement, we have asked for money in the fy12 budget to not only continue to securing the cities, but to add to it. >> securing the cities is protected, i believe, we can discuss that with secretary before and we will -- >> yes, i was referring to the other -- but it is true that in the fy12 budget, securing is city is sustained and we want to add another city to it. >> mr.quail. >> thank you for coming. there's been a lot of talk i think in this, with the budget about the cr that just went through the house and will be going through the senate and coming back probably, but one of the focuses in both the media and here has been what effec
it is going to have on securing the southwest border. i just wanted to give a little lay of the land on how this is going. my look at it is going to be adding more agents, not decreasing agents. is increased funds by $147.9 miion over what it was for fiscal year ten, an increase to what 11 was. it also provides $550 million for fencing infrastructure and technology, $58.8 million for i.c.e. to maintain border hires. also $60 million for operation stone garden, the same as fiscal year 10. now, in going forward with the cr and the fiscal 12, what in terms of priorities, do you think that we should be focusing on for the southwest border? is it more technology, more
border patrol agents? which do you think is more important in that regard? >> first of all, i think there's a lot of -- really can't agree with the lay down you gave of the facts in terms of how they really affect funding sprt southwest border and president quyale will be glad to get with you after this hearing because time isprecious, but even senar kyle put out an article on how it affects the laydown for immigration enforcement. i think there's some bipartisan disquiet there. it's not a good border budget. it's not a good immigration budget and we believe strongly that to keep moving in the direction we're moving is the right thing. the numbers that need to change are going in the right direction
and particularly in arizona. we need more manpower, technology and more funding for infrastructure put in the right places and the right kind of infrastructure. it's hard to say well, one, two and three, it's all of the above because it's a system. then you need to back that system up with enforcement in the interior of the country, which is primarily i.c.e. when you have that in place, you begin to see the dramatic impacts you've been seeing over the past several years. >> thank you very much. i yield back. >> the gentleman from louisiana, mr. richmond, is recognized for three minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and madam secretary. we're having an issue in louisiana that i think rises to a homeland security issue. you talk about dredging of the mississippi river and about all the ships that come through with petrol chemicals and so forth.
one of those ran aground and we have a leak and it falls under your agency in terms of the response. are you at all involved in maki sure our ports are dredged to a safe leavitt at least to their authorized level so don't have that and our pilots had to issue a warning and memorandum to their pilots, not to traverse the river at nightti nighttime. wait till high water because of a ar of running aground and having a spill. so, i know that agencies don't talko each other, but that is a big concern of mine. have you paid any attention to that? >> i'm not personally familiar with that particular issue, but i can say that the coast guard
works very directly with the shipping industry, with those involved. we have the captains of the ports for example and with the army corp. of engineers. >> the other thing i would like to add especially as states start to deal with major budget problems, especially louisiana and we deal with our own problems up here, t grants for emergency preparedness, event planning. if we see a reduction in those grants, is it possible that we create a more general pool so that the local emergency offices can bettertilize or prioritize what they need to use the grants for? >> well,hat's one of the reasons why we've recommended consolidated the current list of 17 into nine. to give locality some more flexibility, to reduce the number of grant applicatns and the pap work they have to
submit. it was something we asked for last year, we're asking for it again in the fy12 budget. >> thank you. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania. chairman of the committee, for three mites. >> thank you. thank you for your extensive preparation. i among many in washington in the last 48 hours have been with those who have been sort of dog earring the most recent report from gao. it was a pretty tough challenge in many parts fs of the government as we look at the issue of homeland security. they were looking at the fragmentation among government programs, but a particular area, the area of bioterrorism and i quote from the report, at least
five departments, eight agencies and more than two dozen appointees oversea $6.8 million related to bioterrorism. it says at one point, there's tho broad integrated national strategy that encompasses all stakeholders with responsibleties. this is on the front end, with respect to systemically identifying risks, assessing resources needed to address that risk and then prioritizing and a al kating that. then says there is no national plan to coordinate federal, state and local efforts following a bio terror event and the united states lacks the technical and operational capabilities required for an adequate response. that's a tough accusation for all of us who share a concern about this issue.
i know you represent just one of the multiple agencies, but this is a big challenge. how do we begin to look at this incredible problem? this is a canary in a coal mine in my mind right now. how do we begin to look at the issue of a national strategy and get that focal point, go across the multle agencies, but not only be better with our resources in terms of fiscally responsible, but deal with the issue of appropriate response? >> first of all, if i might suggest something for the committee to consider. i don't think it's overall helpful for gao reports that are allegedly pointing out alleged vulnerableties to put out in an unclassified format. i think that's a problem and i've referenced iteveral times. i would respectfully ask the congress to really look at that for obvious reasons.
secondly, the issue, i believe, t very comp rated because you're quite correct. it does cross multiple agenciea. you've got hhs, us, the dod, some smaller agencies, all of which have a piece of this. we he been working primarily with hhs on trying to create or construct a pathway forward at the interagency level where bio is concerned. what i would like to do is have some of the people directly involved with that brief you in a classified setting. >> that would be great. a great opportunity to begin try to work on something, whether we like it or n, that's out there now in public and we're going to be asked about. thank you. >> the gentleman from texas. >> thank you very much. i'd like to personally thank you
for being in brownsville attending memorial mass for agent zapat. my agency has continued to be in contact with the family and let them know you would be here today and ask if they had any questions for you. they sent a list of 17. that definitely points out the fact it's a family dedicated to law enforcement. mr. mccall has asked a couple of them and a couple are in details that aren'appropriate for the scope of this meeting, but the one i don't think was asked and i think is important we address, what concrete steps are we taking to make sure this doesn't happen again and are those steps addressed in the budget proposal put together clearly behind the scenes before this event that i consider to be an escalation on the war against drugs in our southern bder? >> i think first of all, thank
you for being at the service. it wasery moving. the family, two other, it was five sons, i think two others are dhs employees. the father is a law enforcement official, retired now, so really a great brownsville family and great citizens of our country. moving forward, first of all, we've been working on a very sbepsive basis with the government of mexico and with doj on not only the investigation of the shooting of the agent, but wh can be done to deal with the entire organizations that are now plaguing mexico. what more can we do to assist the calderon administrion and their fight against the cartels? what more do we need to do to make sure that our agents are
properly supported in the field and wh more can we do in the continental united states to the extent the cartels have fingertip presences here to go after them and there have been at least an open source report, that there have been a number of activities on all those fronts. >> i would urge you to stay in close communication with the family. their law enforcement agency said we'll work with you and have the curiosity that only a law enforcement family might have. don't have a lot of time left. the budget indicates there's no funding in the request for uavs that have been found to be effective on the border. is there a reason for that omission? >> i believe let me clarify that for you. i believe there's funding for two more uavs at the porder and we have the capability to traverse the entire border by uav, so we've greatly expanding
that capability. >> i'm out of time. i have more questions, we'll probably follow up at a future poinin time. >> thank you. >> secretary, thank you very much for your time. i wish you good luck at the white house with the president of the united states and the president of mexico and members of the committee may have additional questions. ask if they could respond to you in writing and you would respond to them. the record will be open for ten days. >> thank you very much, mr. chaian. -- mr. chairman.